International Trends for Bioenergy

Transcription

1 International Trends for Bioenergy Realizing the potential -- Opportunities and constraints Tat Smith Professor Faculty of Forestry, University of Toronto FOCUS on Forest Engineering 2010 Forest Biofuels: A Green Resource? Ingwenyama Sports & Conference Resort White River, Mpumalanga, South Africa 3 November

2 Acknowledgements to colleagues IEA Bioenergy Task 43 and predecessors Dominik Röser Antti Asikainen Finnish Forest Research Institute (METLA), Joensuu Brenna Lattimore Peter Ralevic David Martell Faculty of Forestry, University of Toronto 2

3 Outline IEA ETP 2010 global energy projections through 2050 Describe global and regional patterns of bioenergy use Why forest bioenergy? Synthesize factors influencing bioenergy deployment Drivers Challenges Forest sector opportunities Operational challenges Opportunities for future collaboration IEA Bioenergy Task 43 Biomass Feedstocks for Energy Markets COST Action FP0902 3

4 Why Bioenergy? Global climate change 4 Source:

5 Background: IEA Energy Technology Perspectives projections as a foundation for roadmap development IEA ETP 2010 provides detailed projections of global energy use to 2050, calibrated to World Economic Outlook (WEO) 2009 ETP BLUE Map scenario depicts a set of pathways to reach a 50% reduction in global energy-related CO 2 by 2050 Based on cost-minimization, up to USD 175/ton CO 2 by 2050 Uses a back-casting approach to identify pathways and rampup rates for different technologies and new fuels Use of bioenergy roughly triples by 2050, biofuels demand in transport increases 10-fold Source: OECD/IEA

6 We need a global 50% CO 2 cut by 2050 Gt CO Source: ETP 2010 Baseline emissions 57 Gt BLUE Map emissions 14 Gt WEO ppmcase ETP2010 analysis CCS 19% Renewables 17% Nuclear 6% Power generation efficiency and fuel switching 5% End-use fuel switching 15% End-use fuel and electricity efficiency 38% We need a global 50% CO 2 cut by 2050 A wide range of technologies will be necessary to reduce energy-related 6 CO 2 emissions substantially Source: OECD/IEA 2010

7 Biomass use in ETP 2010 Biomass currently provides around 1100 Mtoe (50 EJ) of primary energy per year 190 Mtoe (8 EJ)/yr of commercial heat and power and 40 Mtoe (1.7 EJ)/yr of liquid transport fuels Traditional biomass accounts for over 800 Mtoe (35 EJ) /yr In BLUE Map scenario biomass use increases to around 3400 Mtoe (140 EJ)/yr in This will require roughly Mt dry biomass between Mha* of land needed, if 50% come from crop and forest residues and the rest from purpose grown energy crops *assuming average yield of 5-10 tons (dry)/ha Source: OECD/IEA

8 Global and regional patterns of bioenergy use Share of bioenergy in world primary energy mix About 72% of woodfuel consumption is in developing countries IEA Bioenergy: ExCo: 2009:05 8

9 Global and regional patterns of bioenergy use Types of biomass in the primary bioenergy mix Of 36 EJ woodfuel used in developing countries, 3 EJ is charcoal Forests are a very important source of bioenergy IEA Bioenergy: ExCo: 2009:05 9

10 World TPES in ETP 2010 Source: ETP 2010 Use of biomass increases 3-fold in the BLUE Map scenario, and provides 20% of TPES (140 EJ) in 2050 Bioenergy accounts for roughly 10% of energy related CO 2 emission 10 reductions in 2050 Source: OECD/IEA 2010

11 Global potential for bioenergy production to 2050 IEA ETP 2010 Huge difference between current and potential use of biomass The range in estimates is an opportunity and a challenge! IEA Bioenergy: ExCo: 2009:05 11

12 Impact of agricultural productivity gains on total technical bioenergy production potential in 2050 (EJ) -- 4 scenarios -- Smeets In: IEA Bioenergy: ExCo: 2009:05 12

13 Biomass use in ETP 2010 Source: ETP 2010 Modern bioenergy production increases significantly in Blue Map, whereas traditional biomass use is reduced by 2050 Around 50% of biomass demand in the BLUE Map scenario is for production of biofuels for transport Source: OECD/IEA

14 Biomass use in ETP 2010 Electricity sector Global electricity production by energy source and scenario Source: ETP 2010 Biomass electricity generation increases significantly and provides 6% (2460 TWh) of total electricity in BLUE Map in 2050 By 2050, all regions produce at least 50% of their electricity from renewables Source: OECD/IEA

15 Biomass use in ETP 2010 Industry Source: ETP 2010 By 2050, biomass use in industry reaches between Mtoe (23-31 EJ), accounting for 12-14% of total industrial energy use in BLUE Map Strongest demand growth comes from the chemical industry, followed by cement and iron/steel sector Source: OECD/IEA

16 Biomass use in ETP 2010 Transport sector Source: ETP 2010 In BLUE Map, transport energy use returns nearly to 2007 level, with more than 50% very low CO 2 fuels Total biofuel use in BLUE Map reaches 760 Mtoe (32 EJ) in 2050, with the major share coming from advanced technologies Biofuels will be particularly important to decarbonise planes, marine vessels and 16 trucks Source: OECD/IEA 2010

17 The role of roadmaps A global price for carbon is necessary but by itself insufficient to accelerate the needed energy technology advancements in time Greater focus on energy technology policies needed Technology roadmaps can support GHG goals by: Identifying and addressing technology-specific barriers Highlighting necessary deployment policies and incentives Directing increased RD&D funding for new technologies Supporting technology diffusion, knowledge sharing among countries Source: OECD/IEA

18 Pathway Link to Resource Base Target 1+ Billion Tons of Biomass Resources Available for Bioenergy and Bioproducts (Excludes conventional Food/Feed/Fiber) DOE/USDA Billion Ton Vision Paper Biomass from Forest Lands Currently Collected and Used Biomass from Agricultural Lands Other Secondary and Tertiary Biomass from Ag. and Forest Lands Wood and Residues to Pulp & Paper and Forest Product Mills 6,7 Grain Crops 1,2 MSW and Urban Wood Waste Fuel Wood Oil Crops 3 Animal Manures Logging and Other Removal Residues Agricultural Residues 4 Food Processing Wastes Fuel Treatments Perennial Grasses Woody Crops 5 Pathway Identification Numbers Source: Russo 18

19 U.S. Department of Energy Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office of the Biomass Program Advanced Biomass R&D Sugar Platform Sugar Feedstocks, Lignin Intermediates Biomass Residues Clean Gas Combined Heat & Power Thermochemical Platform Fuels Chemicals & Materials Conditioned Gas Bio-oils Source: Russo Systems Integration = Biorefineries 19

20 Conversion pathways feedstocks to bio-based products IEA Bioenergy: ExCo: 2009:05 Source: E4tech

21 Forest Sector Biorefinery Pathways Biorefinery Pathway Pulp and Paper Mills Feedstocks Wood Mill Wastes Conversion Pathway Options Under Consideration (each has a B Milestone - cost target ) New Fractionation Process for Hemicellulose Removal Products from C 5/C6 Sugars Black Liquor Gasification Products from BLG Syn Gas Partners Georgia-Pacific Agenda 2020 Program A Milestones Complete systems level demonstration and validation of all technologies to improve corn wet mill facilities using corn grain feedstock Forest Product Mills Wood Mill Wastes Pyrolysis Oil Upgrading None Complete systems level demonstration and validation of all technologies to improve corn dry mill facilities using corn (and other ) grain feedstock Forest Residues Logging Residues Fuel Treatments Biomass Sugar Production Products from C 5/C6 Sugars Products from Lignin Biomass Gasification Products from Synthesis Gas New Fractionation Processes Products from New Process Intermediates None Complete systems level demonstration and validation of all technologies to improve natural oil processing facilities using oil crop feedstock Non-Forest Wood Wastes MSW & Urban Wood Wastes Biomass Sugar Production Products from C 5/C6 Sugars Products from Lignin Biomass Gasification Products from Synthesis Gas New Fractionation Processes Products from New Process Intermediates None Complete systems level demonstration and validation of all technologies to improve processing facilities using agricultural residue feedstocks 21 Source: Russo

22 Development status of main technologies upgrade, heat & power IEA Bioenergy: ExCo: 2009:05 Source: E4tech

23 Development status of main technologies biofuels for transportation IEA Bioenergy: ExCo: 2009:05 Source: E4tech

24 Major ethanol producers with projections to 2017 Source: FAO, The State of Food and Agriculture, Biofuels: Prospects, Risks and Opportunities,

25 Bioenergy policies: Targets Country Denmark Finland Germany Netherlands Norway Sweden United Kingdom Canada United States Main strategy Heat, power, CHP, and/or district heating Ethanol (corn and cellulose) Biomass and bioenergy target - Biofuels target Double to 415 PJ by 2025 from 1995 Double power gen. to 25% by 2020 (CHP) Double to 200 PJ by % share by 2010 from 2006 Double to 100 PJ by 2020 from % increase to 576 PJ by 2010 from PJ future potential (150 PJ present use) 5% share by 2010 None 5% of nation s power and 25% chemicals by % share by 2010, 30% share by

26 South African bioenergy strategy The government's 2003 White Paper on Renewable Energy set a target of GWh of energy to be produced from renewable energy sources, mainly from biomass, wind, solar and small-scale hydro, by Biofuels Industrial Strategy of the Republic of South Africa Department of Minerals and Energy December 2007 adopt a short term focus (5 year pilot) to achieve a 2% penetration level of biofuels in the national liquid fuel supply, or 400 million litres pa. The selected main crops for biofuels development in South Africa are soya, canola, and sunflower for biodiesel and sugar cane and sugar beet for bio-ethanol. The exclusion of other crops and plants such as maize and Jatropha is based on the food security concerns. Further research is still needed to test usability of these in the country. Sources:

27 Why Forest Bioenergy? «In the long term, sustainable forest management strategies aimed at maintaining or increasing forest carbon stocks, while producing a sustained yield of timber, fibre, or energy from the forest, will generate the largest sustained mitigation benefit.» IPCC 2007 ch 9: Forestry, AR4, Group III 27

28 Jobs Lost Mill Closures Why forest bioenergy? Sustaining rural economies in the forested areas becomes increasingly challenging due to mill closures and other factors. Canada Wide Job Loss Due to Mill Closure 2003 October 17, ,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 BC AB SK MB ON QC NB NF NS PEI Job Loss 10,697 1,122 1, ,852 11,453 2, Closures Job Loss Closures 28

29 Nominal value of production, bill. Benefits of forest biomass in rural areas -- Finland examples Structural changes: 6 Global overproduction of pulp and paper products 5 4 Decreasing value of end products in pulp 3 2 pulp and paper energy Increasing values of energy products Lack of peat year Decline of demand in traditional forest industry Asikainen

30 Why forest bioenergy? Opportunity for valuing environmental services Due to concern about global climate change, carbon markets are gradually emerging, yet volatile. US market, US$/Mg CO 2 European Market, /Mg CO 2 Source: CCX 30

31 Why Forest Bioenergy? Forest health (e.g. fire, insect, disease) 31

32 Mountain pine beetle outbreak in B.C. in 2006 by 2008, 50% mature pine dead now east of the Rockies by 2013, 80% of mature pine dead Source: 32

33 Why Forest Bioenergy? Energy Security. Reduce imports Reduce fossil fuel use Increase renewable sources Increase efficiency 33

34 Denmark Finland Germany Sweden The Netherlands United Kingdom Import dependence (%) Canada United States Energy security: Import dependence Biodiesel policies Europe Essentially no fossil fuel reserves Net import Import dependence = Gross consumption Ethanol policies N. America Net exporter, fossil rich IMPOR T Coal Oil Natural gas EXPOR T 34

35 Projected biomass resources distribution in EU 15 in 2030 Biomass potential PJ by 2010, PJ by 2030 Forests will continue to be an important resource (Jorgensen and van Djik) 35

36 If using more forest biomass for renewable energy makes sense, why is deployment so limited? 36

37 Drivers A bioenergy deployment synthesis model What lessons come from analysis of drivers, challenges and indicators? Challenges (-) (+) BIOENERGY DEPLOYMENT (+) Drivers Indicators Monitoring Adaptive framework context Policy evolves in response to measures of success or failure 37

38 Energy indicators: Biomass share Variable biomass shares FI & SE 80% share in forest sector ( 320 PJ & 400 PJ TGC) (EIA, 2008; EUROSTAT, 2009) CA ~80% share in forest sector (~600 PJ TGC) 38

39 Forest energy is important in Nordic countries Denmark 5, Norway >10, in Sweden and Finland ~25% Note the importance of manufacturing by-products ~ 3 TWh Imports < 5 TWh Recycled wood Forest sector > 50 TWh 0.7 TWh Thinning Residues 4.4 TWh Chipwood 1 TWh By-products 5 TWh Black liquor, Pine oil > 35 TWh Source: Björheden,

40 Challenges Feedstock supply Limited forest resources (NL, UK; <0.05 ha/cap) Growing competition for domestic fibre (FI, SE, CA), and for sawdust (pellets) Expanding wood pellet industry resulting in rising wood fibre costs in Europe Opportunities More efficient recovery of unused AAC & logging residues (CA, FI, SE, USA, etc.) Shifting fibre use Small diameter wood (moving away from pulp, SE, FI) Regional opportunities mountain pine beetle in BC (620 million m 3, up to 1 billion m 3 ) Increasing import to meet targets (International market) 40

41 Increasing trade: Europe (WPAC) 41

42 Global trade in bioenergy feedstocks is developing rapidly BC wood pellets shipped to Liége, Belgium IEA Bioenergy: ExCo: 2009:05 42

43 Conclusions from synthesis model: A complex network of drivers and challenges influence energy policy and bioenergy deployment Need for clear policy targets and economic incentives Trade in woody biomass will probably grow a key opportunity What operational and logistical scale is most efficient? Suggestion -- forest energy is a local form of energy that also has to be utilized on a local scale Availability analyses must be conducted for a specific plant, and that s where system optimization analysis can play a role Cross-sectoral issues are significant: Indirect land use change: Food vs. fuel vs. fibre USA housing starts & CAN forest sector vitality 43

44 Assumptions Forests will continue to be a globally important bioenergy feedstock can we get greater penetration? The public will demand that forests be managed sustainably... and that bioenergy be sustainable along the whole supply chain (forest to energy consumer) Concepts of sustainability along the whole supply chain involve complexities of: scale (management unit, landscape, regional, global) direct and indirect Land Use Change cross-sectoral impacts and tradeoffs (food vs fuel vs fibre) applying C&I for environmental, social and economic values 44

45 Critical Components of Sustainable Bioenergy Production Systems Environmental Sustainability Consumer Demand Sustainable Production of Biobased Products Sustainable Forest Operations Manufacturing/ Energy Production Product Delivery Logistics Rural Economic Development Martin Holmer, 2001 IEA Bioenergy Task 31 45

46 Can we ensure whole-tree harvesting at landscape-scales is sustainable? Northern Maine early 1980s 46

47 Weymouth Point, Maine 17-year post-harvest results 2. Acidic deposition may be a concern for exchangeable Mg depletion for this site type. Both the reference and regenerating watersheds had significantly lower forest floor and total soil exchangeable Mg pools than the pre-harvest condition. 1. Whole-tree harvesting had not led to depletions of C, N, or the base cations in this low-elevation spruce-fir forest in central Maine 17 years after regeneration. 3. At this time, we have a limited understanding of the potential interactions between increased N deposition, organic matter, and cation cycling over an entire rotation, as well as for future rotations in northern coniferous forests. Source: McLaughlin & Phillips 2006 Photo: McCormack 47

48 Some provincial concerns seem driven by soil sensitivity to acidic deposition Source: Arp et al. (2007) for The Committee on the Environment of The Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers 48

49 New England guidelines should be site-specific Source: McCormack 49

50 Canadian guidelines should be site specific Site type 3b Sources: OMNR 1997, CFS

51 Our responsibility & challenge: Design low-impact systems Identify risks to soils, water, biodiversity Identify practices to mitigate risks Graphics source: Courtesy Tapio Ranta, VTT Processes

52 Principles and criteria of sustainable woodfuels FAO Forestry Paper 160 IEA Bioenergy Task 31 & FAO-Forestry collaboration 52

53 Principles and criteria of sustainable 2 nd generation biofuels Source: Smith et al

54 Pre-commercial thinning Whole-tree material at roadside What challenges (technical, non-technical, policy, etc.) must we solve to develop sustainable forest bioenergy production systems? Logging slash from final harvest Hybrid poplar 54

55 Consider biomass at individual tree and stand levels 55

56 Precommercial thinning Whole-tree material at roadside Conventional forestry and new opportunities Logging slash from final harvest 56 Hybrid poplar energy plantations

57 Logistical nature of forestry Forest operations & transports Secondary production Lines (network flow) Forest industry Tertiary production Points Forest Primary production Areas Source: Björheden 57

58 Requires efficient integration STAND: 3 Round wood 250 m Forest residues 100 m At least one third 42 odt of the logging residues and stumps will be left in the forest as a fertiliser ROUND WOOD WITH BARK 105 odt 3 HARVESTING FOREST RESIDUES 1 hectare STUMPS 3 Potential m For energy m m = 2,5 i-m odt odt 250 m odt odt m 3 Bark, sawdust and other wood residues odt E.Alakangas 3 SAWMILL/PULP MILL m Wood fuel odt TOTAL WOOD FUELS m = MWh odt Heat production = MWh Electricity production = MWh 58

59 Operational & Supply Chain Analysis Complex system elements Annual need for forest fuels and other fuels Annual availability of forest fuels - Fuel mix (residues, small trees, stumps) - Harvesting conditions - Transport distances in the forest/on road network Roadside landing capacities Location of plant (centre of a town or in the sub urban area)? Size of plant yard (storage)? Dominant technology to produce heat (combustion/gasification) Need for GIS-based availability and cost analysis Total cost of the supply system 59

60 Fuel quality optimization through Optimized supply chains Optimized storage management Right material to the right customer 60

61 Optimized supply chains: Small scale systems in Central Europe 61

62 All flows of assortments Swedish case Source: Filsberg et al

63 1 2 Optimized storage mgmt: Process mapping Stand ready for harvest Calls company and makes offer Receives 25 % Receives measurement note Receives the rest 75 % Signs contract of total sum Forest ow ner PHONE Accepts offer No Yes MONEY TRANSFER Forest owner MONEY TRANSFER Forest serivce company Visits the stand all criteria could be input as decisions. not yet sure if that makes sense Is the stand Sets up offer suitable? Yes No Decissions made in that processes and thinks to care of like storage places, turning points etc. could be mentioned in the activity data map. Only decisions directly influencing the process should be Work displayed in the map Finished1 Offer Work Finished2 Sets up purchase contract Purchase contract Creates stand file Advanced payment to forest ow ner Stand file Chooses contractor Creates logging w ork order PHONE Prepares logging maps MANUAL Why is not a single document created: map is a paper HANDING map including shorthand instructions. document. should OVER contractor gets map anyw ay. having be displayed in the both in w ritten form might make things a map little simpler Forest service company Supervisor measures piles manually POSTING Final payment to forest ow ner Manual handing over Pays Logging company POSTING? MONEY TRANSFER Inputs pile data Pile files in Excel Creates chipping w ork order PHONE Prepares chipping maps map is a paper Why is not a single document created: document. should map including shorthand instructions. be displayed in the contractor gets map anyw ay. having map both in w ritten form might make things a little simpler MANUAL HANDING OVER Sold piles Excel file Pays chipping contractor Sets up w ork order for accounting office Accounting w ork order Receives payment from plant MONEY TRANSFER No Measurement note Receives w ork input Checks stand location Loads machines on trucks Drives to stand Checks stand condition Has clearing been done? Yes Unloads machines Does the soil have sufficient bearing Yes capacity? Performs logging operation Performs forw arding operation Does forw arder have boom Yes scale? Invoices company Decissions made in that processes and thinks to No care of like storage places, turning points etc. could be mentioned in the activity data map. Only Receives decisions directly influencing the process should be payment No displayed in the map Logging contractor Logging contractor Changes stand Changes stand Must change pile MANUAL This branch referres to intesively contaminated piles. Not yet sure how depict that properly If chip quality is bad it occasionally becomes necessary to deliver to HANDING OVER OR PHONE Maybe another plan MONEY TRANSFER Chipping and transportation contractor Chipping and transportation contractor Stored w ork orders Chooses next w ork site Checks pile location Drives chipper to w ork site Chips piles Are piles and w ork site established properly? No Yes Are contaminations No in the pile? Yes Delivers chips to the plant Ascertains delivered chip volume Receives payment from company Processing of piles takes additional time Machine needs more maintanance Plant Plant Receives chips 63 In case of Eno no w eighing or ascertaining of moisture content. Might need request how this is done in other cases Pays company Accounting office Accounting office Sets up invoice Invoice for plant POSTING?

64 Supply chain planning matrix Source: Feng et al

65 Building teams -- opportunities for collaboration International networks IEA Bioenergy -- IEA Bioenergy Task Biomass Feedstocks for Energy markets COST Action FP Development and harmonisation of new operational research and assessment procedures for sustainable forest biomass supply Canadian research network FPInnovations/NSERC forest initiative Value Chain Optimization Network 65

66 Opportunities for collaboration IEA Bioenergy Task period Supply-chain, Operations and Technological Assessments Antti Asikainen and Dominik Röser, Finnish Forest Research Institute (METLA), Finland. Bruce Talbot, Norwegian Institute of Forest Research and Danish Centre for Forest, Landscape & Planning. 66

67 COST Action FP0902 Development and harmonisation of new operational research and assessment procedures for sustainable forest biomass supply Dominik Röser Finnish Forest Research Institute, Metla Objective: To harmonize forest energy terminology and methodologies of forest operations research and biomass availability calculations thereby building the scientific capacity within forest energy research and supporting the technology transfer of the forest biomass procurement chain and sustainable forest management. 67

68 COST Action FP0902 linkages 68

69 THANK YOU! Questions? Faculty of Forestry 69

70 Contact information: Tat Smith Dean and Professor, Faculty of Forestry, University of Toronto Peter Ralevic PhD student, Faculty of Forestry, University of Toronto David Martell Professor, Faculty of Forestry, University of Toronto Dominik Röser METLA, Joensuu, Finland Antti Asikainen METLA, Joensuu, Finland 70